1. NEIL ABERCROMBIE AARON S. FUJIOKA
GOVERNOR ADMINISTRATOR
STATE OF HAWAII
STATE PROCUREMENT OFFICE
P.O. Box 119
Honolulu, Hawaii 96810-0119
Telephone: (808) 587-4700
e-mail: State.procurement.office~hawaii.gov
http://hawaii.gov/spo SPO-14-040
July 31, 2013
Mr. Gregory King, Chair
Mr. David Langille, Vice-Chair
Mr. Dean Seki, Secretary
Mr. Howard Garval, Member
Mr. Ronald Hirano, Member
Ms. Kathy Suzuki-Kitagawa, Member
Procurement Policy Board
do State Comptroller
Honolulu, Hawaii 96813
Dear Chair King and Members of the Board:
SUBJECT: Request for Reconsideration on Board’s Decision
for the Position ofAdministrator, State Procurement Office
The State Procurement Office (SPO) has written 2 letters to the Procurement Policy Board
(Board), requesting a reconsideration oftheir decision for the position of Administrator, State
Procurement Office. On July 16, 2013, Deputy Attorney General Stella Kam sent a letter
addressed to the Administrator of SPO and copied all the Board members. In her letter, she
stated “Your letters to the Board dated June 21, 2013 and June 24, 2013 have already provided
notice to the Board thatyou are requesting the Board reconsider its decision. Whether or not
the Board does take action in accordance with your request isfor the Board to decide. We note
that, under section 3-121-1.01(a), the Board’s actions are subject to the parliamentary
procedures as setforth in Robert’s Rules ofOrder Newly Revised. Robert’s Rules specifically
states that a motion to consider “can be made only by a member who voted with the prevailing
side.” RONR (10th ed.), p. 304, 1. 30-31. Thus, a motion to reconsider can only be made by a
Board member who voted at the June 20, 2013 meeting infavor ofreopening the recruitment.”
This is to request that one ofthe five members who voted in favor of reopening the recruitment
to please place this matter on the Board’s next meeting agenda and to make a motion to
reconsider this Board action.
SPO knows of three applicants from within, Ruth Yamaguchi, Mara Smith and myself. I finiily
believe the Governor should have choices and have encouraged SPO staffto apply for the
position of Administrator. Everyone should have the opportunity to submit an application to be
considered for this position, as circumstances can change.

2. Mr. Gregory King, Chair SPO 14-040
July 31, 2013
Page 2
In regards to Ruth, it is comnion knowledge that Ruth at this time is planning to retire at the end
of July. The recruitment process for the Administrator’s position was initiated in hopes that a
decision would be forthcoming prior to Ruth’s retirement so that if she was the one chosen, Ruth
would have the option ofproceeding with her retirement or becoming the next Administrator.
The Employees’ Retirement System allows you to change your retirement date 3 times to
accommodate situations such as these.
I have known and worked with Ruth during the past 16 years and was the one who appointed her
as Assistant Administrator. When it comes to public procurement knowledge Ruth is a wealth of
information. Ruth and I share similar vision, principles and goals with regards to public
procurement and the SPO. Our approach and styles may vary but it has never adversely affected
our professional relationship and friendship. Ruth has announced her intentions to retire after 33
years of service, 29 ofthose years at SPO. Ruth may have been reluctant to apply but she is
extremely qualified and has every right to pursue the Administrator’s position, and depending on
the results may affect her retirement plans. The Board would be doing a disservice to the public,
government and Ruth, should they block her application as a qualified applicant from the
Governor’s consideration.
Marajoined the SPO 16 years ago at my recommendation. I have known and worked closely
with Mara for 20 years and she has always supported and helped accomplish significant
initiatives. Her knowledge ofprocurement has grown over the years. Mara is an intelligent,
dedicated, knowledgeable colleague that I have the utmost respect for her. The Board would be
doing a disservice to the public, government and Mara, should they block her application as a
qualified applicant from the Governor’s consideration.
DAGS Personnel has indicated that as of July 1, 2013 the salary for the Administrator’s position
will increase substantially from what was previously advertised. This change alone may
encourage Ruth or Mara to accept the position, if offered. I openly endorse either applicant and
would highly recommend Ruth and Mara. SPO also advocates for the 4th qualified applicant to
be treated fairly as they may not be aware ofthe situation.
I believe no one is more qualified than myself, having served as Administrator for the past 12
years and before that, 4 years as Assistant Administrator and Procurement Manager for SPO.
Nevertheless, the statute provides the Governor the latitude to select anyone from the list of
qualified applicants. The Governor does not have to select the most qualified, it is the
Governor’s prerogative to select any one of the 4 qualified applicants. There is no statutory
authority for the Board to block qualified applicants from being considered by the Governor.
Part of SPO’s reason for advising the Board that there are no statutes or rules that allow the
ranking of the qualified applicants is to be consistent with the Governor’s authority to make a
selection based on the Governor’s determination.

3. Mr. Gregory King, Chair SPO 14-040
July 31, 2013
Page 3
Procurement is a defined transparent and fair process that does not allow you to “make it up as
you go along” or to cancel and start over when you do not get the contractor/vendor you wanted.
It is an established process that needs to be followed taking into consideration preparation and
planning to attain the goods, services or construction in a proper and timely manner. In SPO’s
training workshop no. 170, Overview ofProcurement Practices, HRS Chapter 103D, I always
quote the profound remarks of Former Associate Justice of the Supreme Court ofthe United
States Potter Stewart, “Ethics is knowing the djfference between what you have a right to do and
what is right to do. “to remind everyone that although the laws and rules may allow you to
achieve your goal, it is the application of those laws and rules that matter also.
The controversy surrounding the recruitment process for the Administrator, is a very discerning
matter. Eliminating the controversy should supersede any legal technicalities.
The Governor’s Administration is about furthering openness and transparency of government.
His A New Day in Hawaii initiative is based on utilizing technology to make information and
data easily accessible and readily available to the public. Allowing an open forum to discuss the
merits of the process being utilized by the Board follows the guiding principles ofthe
administration championing government transparency and fairness. Placing this letter, as well as
the previous 2 letters, on the Board’s agenda allows for public disclosure and public disposition.
It is again requested that one of the five members who voted in favor of reopening the
recruitment to please:
• place this matter on the next Board agenda at the meeting tentatively scheduled for
August 14, 2013;
• make a motion to reconsider this Board action; and
• request that all 4 names ofthe qualified applicants from the original solicitation be sent
to the Governor.
As the Board met on July 25, 2013 with their Deputy Attorney General Stella Kam in executive
session to discuss the Board’s powers and duties, we are requesting the information i.e. statutes,
rules, etc. that gives the Board the authority:
• to dismiss 2 of the qualified applicants; and
• to continue with the 2nd recruitment.
Sincerely,
Aaron S. Fujioka
c: The Honorable Bruce Coppa, Chief of Staff
Office of the Governor
Ms. Ruth Yamaguchi, State Procurement Office
Ms. Mara Smith, State Procurement Office